Way back when, I was hoping for some honest work from this Special Counsel, partially because he was recommended by conservative Senator Peter Fitzgerald (no relation), and partially because there were reports floating around about his prior difficulties with Judy Miller — she flat-out tipped off an Islamic charity suspected of funding terrorism, that a raid was scheduled, by calling them for “comments” prior to the raid.

All documents and other potential evidence was shredded or cleared out before the raid took place, and Fitz came up with zip.

He was reportedly not a happy camper, and it was clear that the leak to her had to have come from his own office (or from someone inside the investigation). She would not divulge her source.

If that is all true, I assume the opportunity to toss her in jail would seem like a personal fringe benefit to Fitz (it would to me, given a similar history), but I’ve become convinced that he is not immune to political Party considerations (I think he’s about as apolitical as NY prosecutor Spitzer or Spritzer, whatever, now getting ready for a gov’s mansion run), and I’m pretty certain Fitz is not on the Republican side of the aisle.

His office is in Illinois, Chicago area. Big time corruption trial now going on is against former Republican Governor George Ryan, stemming from his stint as Illinois Secretary of State.

There’s no doubt that corruption was king in the IL Sec of State office, but it was also deeply ingrained way before, and after, Ryan held that seat. None of the patronage bosses or Sec of State facility heads, more directly implicated in ongoing day-to-day corruption, have apparently been targeted.

The particular incident that was a catalyst to charges against Ryan, a highway accident involving an unqualified trucker’s license, bought & paid for, was clearly an example of corruption, but at the lower level of Sec of State facililities, usually run — then and now — as little fiefdoms by patronage workers with “clout.”

No evidence of any prosecutorial interest in that, though.

In this apparent second subpoena, Fitz wanted conversations between Cooper and official sources prior to July 14, 2003 regarding former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, his 2002 trip to Niger, his wife Valerie Plame, and/or any affiliation between his wife Valerie Plame and the CIA.

He must have gotten some tip from other testamony that Cooper might have already known about Joe’s wife being in the CIA from earlier stories he wrote prior to July 13, 2003.

SBD

Quote of a famous Texas Ranger (no, not the baseball kind) to Joe Wilson.
“you can run, you can hide. But in the end, you will just die (as in your career) tired.
Joe Wilson’s lies are going to soon be singing their swan song.

Shortly thereafter, Cooper agreed to sit for deposition and Time agreed to produce certain documents. That deposition took place on August 23, 2004. Mot. to Quash at 4. At Cooper’s deposition, Special Counsel explicitly reserved the right to seek additional testimony from Cooper if the need arose. Government’s Response to Motion to Quash Grand Jury Subpoenas (“Gov’t Response”) at 3. After Cooper’s deposition and Time’s production of certain documents, Special Counsel made a motion to vacate the findings of contempt against Cooper and Time, which the Court granted.

On September 13, 2004, Special Counsel issued [**3] a second set of subpoenas upon Mr. Cooper and Time. These subpoenas requested testimony and documents from Mr. Cooper and documents from Time regarding conversations between Cooper and official sources prior to July 14, 2003 regarding former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, his 2002 trip to Niger, his wife Valerie Plame, and/or any affiliation between his wife Valerie Plame and the CIA. Mot. to Quash at 6. Cooper and Time currently move to quash those subpoenas based, in part, on arguments already rejected by this Court in its July 20, 2004 Memorandum Opinion in the cases Misc. Nos. 04-296 and 04-297 and the September 9, 2004 Memorandum Opinion in the case Misc. No. 04-407. The Court incorporates the rulings in those Opinions to this case by reference. Cooper and Time raise the additional argument that the second set of subpoenas should be quashed because they are unreasonable and/or oppressive under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 17(c)(2). In addition to the papers filed in opposition to the motion to quash, Mr. Fitzgerald has submitted an ex parte affidavit filed under seal.

The motion to quash was denied.

SBD

What if Fitzgerald is actually running a fake case against Libby to allow Libby’s defense to call reporters to the stand and unmask the entire scandal as a fraud?

Or even more nefarious, doing so to set a new precedent in US law, where reporters will be targeted for printing classified information?

Now I will take my tin-foil hat off, and eat some dinner. Ciao.